Im sick of this shit.

[KensPen]

EH, but there was a black backlash after Roots......
I think sometimes seeing an emotional depiction of something is more compelling than just an intellectual understanding of it.

[The Brain]

Originally posted by KensPen
EH, but there was a black backlash after Roots......
I think sometimes seeing an emotional depiction of something is more compelling than just an intellectual understanding of it.

That's true too. But emotions might have still been somewhat raw during the time "Roots" <a href=http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0075572/ target=new>aired back in 1977</a>, if only because the race equality movement was only about 20-30 years old. Blacks still felt (hell, we still feel sometimes) that they were being treated as second-class in American history; this just showed it to everyone from a different angle. But I doubt if you were racist beforehand *cough* Sloats *cough*, that watching this movie suddenly made you feel sympathetic to the plight of Africans and their descendants.

By comparison, this is supposed to be a retelling of events that happened:

A) halfway across the world (yes, Africa is halfway across the world, you yahoos, but "Roots" focuses on what happened during America's slavery period)
B) over two millenia ago

Also remember, this mini-series aired back before cable was commonplace, so everyone tuned in. <i>The Passion</i> is, by its very nature, an art house flick. What sort of distribution will it get? How many people will actually sit through a film done entirely in Latin and Aramaic, when they don't know what anyone is saying?

And granted, I'm sure Mel Gibson is trying to be as accurate as possible, but there are limits. <i>The Ten Commandments</i> was a great movie, but hardly accurate, because no one who was alive back then can verify. Hell, even <a href=http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0055774/ target=new>Barabbas</a> was a fine Biblical flick, but how true could it have been? It was about a man who basically everyone knew from about 5 lines of text in the Bible. When making a movie about any historical or literary figure, the film <i>has</i> ot be taken with a grain of salt, unless that person is there to tell the story in their own words.

[Sloats]

Until you start getting college educations and getting your children out of the deplorable inner city school systems, you will always be second class citizens.






Same goes for my white brethen in the trailer parks, except they don't take advantage of the fine suburban school system.

[The Brain]

Originally posted by Sloats
Until you start getting college educations and getting your children out of the deplorable inner city school systems, you will always be second class citizens.

Same goes for my white brethen in the trailer parks, except they don't take advantage of the fine suburban school system.

I would grant you that argument, except it's not always possible for someone living in the inner city to get a better education and move up in the world when politics and world views are often designed to work against them.

Whenever you get a chance, look up the state district boundaries in your area. See how they contour and bend oddly not by street, but by demographic in the populace. How all the wealthier neighborhoods seem to live in one district, while poorer ones live in another. It didn't happen purely by coincidence.

Hell, in Brooklyn and Queens, there are routine arguments over redistricting, because politicians are looking at getting governance over wealthier constituents. No one wants to help out the destitute (no matter what they say), because there is truthfully nothing <i>immediately</i> beneficial in doing so-- in the long term yes, because those destitute who do succeed in life might come back to help out the old neighborhood, but what politician wants to stake his/her career on such a long-term bet?

The result is an endless cycle where the poorer folks get passed around like a drunken frat girl, and are underrepresented for things such as money for education, new housing and better living conditions. As a result, they can't afford to go to college and earn skills necessary to get the higher-paying jobs.

I think what you then see is the attitude, the feeling that somehow the government <i>owes</i> them something, and that they should just sit around and wait until it gets there, like it's some sort of magic cure-all.

[ResidualBitterness]

Originally posted by Wookies Cruel Circus
I notice no one is complaining about the actual ACCURACY of the movie...

That's because they won't let the ADL see the movie. The script got out, people got outraged, but only invited folks get to see the film. If it weren't particularly anti semetic, wouldn't the filmakers have let a few Jews see it to tell everyone else it wasn't so bad?

[The Brain]

Originally posted by ResidualBitterness

Originally posted by Wookies Cruel Circus
I notice no one is complaining about the actual ACCURACY of the movie...

That's because they won't let the ADL see the movie. The script got out, people got outraged, but only invited folks get to see the film. If it weren't particularly anti semetic, wouldn't the filmakers have let a few Jews see it to tell everyone else it wasn't so bad?

Well, I don't think Mel Gibson wanted anyone to see it until the story was complete, because obviously things can be misconstrued easily when you only get one side of the story.

I mean, <a href=http://board.yourmomsbox.net/viewthread.php?tid=1341 target=new>it's been argued in another thread</a>, the Jews are upset because they're being portrayed as the villians here (in addition to the Roman Empire). Well you know what? As far as Christianity is concerend, 2,000+ years ago, Jews <i>were</i> the villian, so accept it and move on. It happened, and future Christians were victimized through systematic persecution... same as the Holocuast, when the Jews were the victims... same as the four separate Crusades, when the Muslims were the victims... same as the European dominance of the Orient, when Buddhism and Shintoism were nearly quashed by Christian missionaries.

The fact is, throughout history, <b>EVERY</b> religion at some point or another has been persecuted, victimized, or played the role of villian by attacking those of another religion-- and some would argue that current events dictate just that. Why should Jews try and hog the "oh, woe is us" feeling to themselves? It often seems as if they want to be acknowledged as the world's resident chewtoy, when that is simply not the case.

[KensPen]

Why should Jews try and hog the \"oh, woe is us\" feeling to themselves? It often seems as if they want to be acknowledged as the world's resident chewtoy, when that is simply not the case

agreed,
but at the same time, they have had a sustained history of persecussion,
But it is their own doing,
as a people without a state,
their religion became the only thing that defined them as a people.
so they were very seperatist.

They never really tried to merge into their host society.

SO, they were very identifiable,
AND
they often lived lives of exclusion, so they didn't engender much support from the populace when they were mistreated.

they were the bankers to nations of Christians precluded from being money lenders. hence they were seen as the evil ones with all the money.

oh well.

[Sloats]

Originally posted by The Brain

Originally posted by Sloats
Until you start getting college educations and getting your children out of the deplorable inner city school systems, you will always be second class citizens.

Same goes for my white brethen in the trailer parks, except they don't take advantage of the fine suburban school system.

I would grant you that argument, except it's not always possible for someone living in the inner city to get a better education and move up in the world when politics and world views are often designed to work against them.

Whenever you get a chance, look up the state district boundaries in your area. See how they contour and bend oddly not by street, but by demographic in the populace. How all the wealthier neighborhoods seem to live in one district, while poorer ones live in another. It didn't happen purely by coincidence.

Hell, in Brooklyn and Queens, there are routine arguments over redistricting, because politicians are looking at getting governance over wealthier constituents. No one wants to help out the destitute (no matter what they say), because there is truthfully nothing <i>immediately</i> beneficial in doing so-- in the long term yes, because those destitute who do succeed in life might come back to help out the old neighborhood, but what politician wants to stake his/her career on such a long-term bet?

The result is an endless cycle where the poorer folks get passed around like a drunken frat girl, and are underrepresented for things such as money for education, new housing and better living conditions. As a result, they can't afford to go to college and earn skills necessary to get the higher-paying jobs.

I think what you then see is the attitude, the feeling that somehow the government <i>owes</i> them something, and that they should just sit around and wait until it gets there, like it's some sort of magic cure-all.

Well, maybe if y'all stopped having babies at age 16 and stopped using drugs to escape your problems and focused on how you can make yourself more employable and worthy to society, instead of being pawns to certain politicans who want to keep you poor and ignorant so that you will find yourself systematically dependant on the government for your basic needs because your vote is cheaper to buy than the educated populous.....





Oh, I'm talking about my trailer brethren again.

[The Brain]

Originally posted by Sloats
Well, maybe if y'all stopped having babies at age 16

Geez, do you <i>always</i> have to take potshots at Silera every chance you get? :lol:

[Ladbag]

Originally posted by The Brain

Originally posted by Sloats
Until you start getting college educations and getting your children out of the deplorable inner city school systems, you will always be second class citizens.

Same goes for my white brethen in the trailer parks, except they don't take advantage of the fine suburban school system.

I would grant you that argument, except it's not always possible for someone living in the inner city to get a better education and move up in the world when politics and world views are often designed to work against them.

Whenever you get a chance, look up the state district boundaries in your area. See how they contour and bend oddly not by street, but by demographic in the populace. How all the wealthier neighborhoods seem to live in one district, while poorer ones live in another. It didn't happen purely by coincidence.

Hell, in Brooklyn and Queens, there are routine arguments over redistricting, because politicians are looking at getting governance over wealthier constituents. No one wants to help out the destitute (no matter what they say), because there is truthfully nothing <i>immediately</i> beneficial in doing so-- in the long term yes, because those destitute who do succeed in life might come back to help out the old neighborhood, but what politician wants to stake his/her career on such a long-term bet?

The result is an endless cycle where the poorer folks get passed around like a drunken frat girl, and are underrepresented for things such as money for education, new housing and better living conditions. As a result, they can't afford to go to college and earn skills necessary to get the higher-paying jobs.

I think what you then see is the attitude, the feeling that somehow the government <i>owes</i> them something, and that they should just sit around and wait until it gets there, like it's some sort of magic cure-all.

WELL SAID.